Beatriz Mesquita
Laranjeiro
O Desafio da comunicação da Responsabilidade
Social Corporativa: O Caso da Coca-Cola
The Challenge of Communicating Corporate Social
Responsibility: The Case of Coca-Cola
Beatriz Mesquita
Laranjeiro
O Desafio da comunicação da Responsabilidade
Social Corporativa: O Caso da Coca-Cola
The Challenge of Communicating Corporate Social
Responsibility:The Case of Coca-Cola
Dissertação apresentada à Universidade de Aveiro para cumprimento dos requisitos necessários à obtenção do grau de Mestre em Marketing, realizada sob a orientação científica da Professora Doutora Susana Regina Bacelar de Vasconcelos Marques, Professora Adjunta do Instituto Superior de
o júri
Presidente Professora Doutora Ana Cristina Furão Teles Estima
Professora Adjunta em Regime Laboral, Universidade de Aveiro
Arguente Doutora Jacinta Raquel Miguel Moreira
Professora Adjunta, Instituto Politécnico de Leiria – Escola Superior de Tecnologia e Gestão
Orientadora Professora Doutora Susana Regina Bacelar de Vasconcelos Marques
agradecimentos Um agradecimento muito especial para a Professora Doutora Susana Regina Bacelar de Vasconcelos Marques, que me proporcionou todos os meios que me levaram a concluir esta investigação com sucesso.
Um agradecimento igualmente especial ao Professor José Luís Oliveira, cuja paciência e bondade levaram também ao sucesso desta etapa da minha vida académica.
Adicionalmente, agradeço aos meus amigos com os quais partilhei
intermináveis horas de trabalho, entre dissertações de marketing, engenharia e design. Aprendi imenso com vocês.
Por fim, o maior agradecimento aos meus pais, ao meu irmão e irmãs, e ainda aos meus colegas de trabalho. Todos vocês representaram, nesta fase, momentos de alegria que foram muito importantes.
palavras-chave Responsabilidade Social Corporattiva, RSC, RSC Aspiracional, Valor Partilhado, Marketing Crítico, Coca-Cola
resumo A comunicação de responsabilidade social empresarial tem vindo a sofrer alterações ao longo dos últimos anos, tendo evoluído para um novo paradigma de valor partilhado pelas empresas e sociedade, através do qual se sugere uma atividade económica lucrativa da qual possam também surgir benefícios a nível social e de progresso societal.
Neste contexto, o presente trabalho averigua os desafios, tensões e complexidades da comunicação da responsabilidade social empresarial usando como caso de estudo a empresa Coca-Cola, através de uma perspetiva de marketing crítico. Representa uma investigação realizada através de métodos qualitativos de pesquisa secundária e primária, que se traduziram na análise dos relatórios de sustentabilidade da empresa bem como de um documentário de investigação jornalística e ainda das evidências de entrevistas a consumidores.
Assim, através de uma triangulação dos dados, foi possível determinar as divergências e tensões entre as três perspetivas – empresa, media e consumidores – e concluiu-se que, embora se sugira que os consumidores possuam perceções positivas acerca da comunicação de responsabilidade social, a emergência por questões de sustentabilidade na sociedade pode levar à manipulação e sugestões de performance ambiental desfasadas da realidade, comunicadas através de documentos como, por exemplo, relatórios empresariais e/ou anúncios de produto, situação essa que está sob a
keywords Corporate Social Responsibility, CSR, Aspirational CSR, Shared Value, Critical Marketing, Coca-Cola
abstract The communication of Corporate Social Responsibility has undergone changes in recent years. It has evolved into a new paradigm of shared value between companies and society; one that suggests that it is possible for companies to engage in profitable activities which provide for benefits on a social level. Given this context, this work explores the challenges, tensions and
complexities of the communication of corporate social responsibility, using The Coca-Cola Company as a case study and from a critical marketing perspective. The study involved qualitative methods of secondary and primary research based on an analysis of the company’s sustainability reports, a journalistic investigatory documentary and evidence from consumer interviews. A triangulation of the resulting data made it possible to determine the
divergences and tensions between the three perspectives – company, media and consumers. This then allowed the conclusion that, although consumer perceptions of the communication of corporate social responsibility are positive, the emergence of sustainability issues in society can lead to manipulations and suggestions of unreal environmental performance, communicated through documents as sustainability reports and/or product advertisements, a situation that has attracted the attention of the media.
Table of Contents
List of Abbreviations ... III List of Figures ... V List of Tables ... VII
Chapter 1. Introduction ... 1
1.1. Research Study ... 2
1.2. Justification of the Research ... 3
1.3. Objectives ... 3
1.4. Dissertation Structure ... 4
Chapter 2. Literature Review... 5
2.1. Defining Corporate Social Responsibility ... 5
2.2. From Philanthropy to Shared Value ... 12
2.3. Communicating CSR ... 16
2.4. Ethics and Greenwashing ... 22
2.5. Green, Social and Critical Marketing ... 27
Chapter 3. Methodology ... 29
3.1. Case Study: The Coca-Cola Company ... 29
3.2. Research Methodology ... 34
3.3. Sources of Data Collection ... 36
3.3.1.Company’s Perspective ... 37 3.3.2. Media’s Perspective ... 38 3.3.3. Consumer’s Perspective ... 38 Chapter 4. Findings ... 45 4.1. Sustainability Reports ... 46 4.2. Documentary ... 57 4.3. Interviews ... 68 4.4. Discussion ... 83
Chapter 5. Final Considerations ... 85
5.1. Managerial Implications ... 86
5.2. Limitations and Further Research ... 87
Bibliography ... 88
List of Abbreviations
CEO Chief Executive Officer CP Corporate Philanthropy CSI Corporate Social Initiatives CSO Chief Sustainability Officer CSR Corporate Social Responsibility CSV Creating Shared Value
ESG Environmental, Social and Governance GPAP Global Plastic Action Partnership IMC Integrated Marketing Communications NGO Non-governmental Organisation NPO Non-profit Organisations
PAC Public Affair and Communications PET Polyethylene Terephthalate
PRAISE Packaging and Recycling Association for Indonesia Sustainable Environment
List of Figures
Figure 1. Research study scheme. ... 2
Figure 2. Dissertation structure. ... 4
Figure 3. The Pyramid of Corporate Social Responsibility. ... 8
Figure 4. The Triple Bottom Line ... 9
Figure 5. The Hierarchy of Corporate Responsibilities. ... 13
Figure 6. The steps into creating the ideal business case for obtaining shared value. 16 Figure 7. Opposing Forces in Aspirational CSR Communication. ... 21
Figure 8. A framework of sustainable marketing. ... 28
Figure 9. The Coca-Cola Company logo. ... 30
Figure 10. Coca-Cola Journey website landing page from October 2019. ... 32
Figure 11. Methodology model. ... 37
Figure 12. PlantBottle advertisement. ... 41
Figure 13. “Round in Circles” campaign. ... 41
Figure 14. Content Analysis. ... 43
Figure 15. Findings structure... 45
Figure 16. Packaging mix at the 2015-2016 report ... 51
Figure 17. Packaging mix at the 2017 report. ... 51
Figure 18. Number of packages introduced in 2018 ... 52
Figure 19. 2016 public policy risk matrix and lobby focus of Coca-Cola. ... 63
Figure 20. Interviewees gender distribution. ... 69
Figure 21. Interviewees age distribution. ... 69
List of Tables
Table 1. Theories of CSR. ... 9
Table 2. Comparing CSR with Creating Shared Value. ... 15
Table 3. The variants of greenwashing. ... 26
Table 4. Detailed reports structure and addressed issues... 47
Table 5: Coca-Cola reported initiatives and programs detailed. ... 55
Table 6. Overall participants and main exposed cases of the documentary. ... 67
Table 7. Participants academic level, field of studies and occupation. ... 69
Tables 8 and 9. Distribution of worrying social and environmental issues mentioned by participants... 70
Chapter 1. Introduction
Nowadays, consumers are more likely to choose brands that actively communicate sustainable aspects of their products and themselves (Houlihan & Harvey, 2018), a situation that creates a growing need for companies to keep up with this type of external pressure. Furthermore, not only does awareness of environmental impact rise but so does the impact of products on consumers’ lifestyles. In fact, the trend of being conscious and self-aware of everything that is being consumed does not need to be thoroughly investigated in order to acknowledge that it exists and is on the rise. With this in mind, companies continuously commission ads and publicity to convince the public about how eco-friendly they are (Jeevan, 2014), since this is the aspect that may differentiate them from the competition or put them under the spotlight. Marketing, as a concept, shifts from the traditional model, that defines it as an activity in which sales and market share matter the most, to a new paradigm, under which it is approached as a more humane activity, where value, utility and environmental impact are constantly considered (Khan & Rafat, 2015). The green consumer, once not that easy to find, claims a presence in the market and becomes one of the most important variables in the achievement of market success.
Consequently, companies must now take their environmental impact and the green level of their products more seriously, in order to not be left behind and to thrive economically. To satisfy their consumers, a lot of manufacturers have taken significant steps aimed at making their products and their companies “greener”. They then communicate this strongly through a Corporate Social Responsibility posture.
However, since the 1960s, more attention has been given to the “dark side of marketing” (Tadajewski & Brownie, 2008). From a sustainability perspective, many companies started to characterize their products as “green” and “eco-friendly”, but
only as a marketing strategy to increase sales and profit (Jeevan, 2014). The approach adopted by sellers and corporations seems to be to shade out the negative, while blindly empowering the positive. This is usually called greenwashing.
1.1. Research Study
Anchored in the current literature, this dissertation aims to explore the phenomenon of the corporate communication of social responsibility. More specifically, it will prospect and analyse the implications, challenges and tensions firms may face when they opt to communicate sustainability in a society where this type of communication can be targeted from several perspectives. The work of the study took the form of a case study of The Coca-Cola Company, from a critical marketing perspective, and involved analysing three distinct perspectives: that of the company, that of the media and that of the consumer. The methodological approach taken is to triangulate the data from multiple sources to provide a basis for the final discussion.
Figure 1. Research study scheme. Source: study author. Communication of CSR
Media's Perspective Coca-Cola's
1.2. Justification for the Research
A personal objective of mine has always been to contribute to the evolution of sustainability studies in marketing. Initial research into this area brought up a number of companies, including Coca-Cola, which was often related to effective shared value initiatives or, in contrast, greenwashing practices. Examples include recognition of the company’s positive performance in places such as Brazil (Shared Value Initiative, n.d.), or public callouts of the negative environmental effects of its business activity in other parts of the world (Sauven, 2017).
With this in mind, it seemed important to address this type of case, to better understand the phenomenon of corporate communication of good environmental, social and economic performance versus the actual performance of the company. This dual and complex theme engenders issues of transparency and credibility.
Additionally, given the specifications and particularities of these issues, it was determined that this dissertation would adopt an analysis from a critical marketing point of view. This would allow for the exploration of the above-mentioned issues, whilst incorporating the perspectives of the company and those of its various different stakeholders.
1.3. Objectives
The main objective of this dissertation, to be achieved through the application of the methods proposed in Chapter 3. Methodology, is to analyse the phenomenon of corporate communication of social responsibility, while exploring the specific example of The Coca-Cola Company. The study scrutinises a previously noticed existing duality between the communication of environmentally friendly practices regarding its packaging and plastic waste and the implications that emerge when internal activities indicate otherwise. Specifically, the work will explore the tensions between different stakeholder’s perspectives and, through a cross-analysis, help explain why corporate social responsibility is such a complex phenomenon.
1.4. Dissertation Structure
Following this introduction, Chapter 2. Literature Review provides an essential overview of the theoretical basis for this investigation. It starts by defining corporate social responsibility and philanthropy, the concept of shared value, and, given that the study focuses on communication practices, it will also cover the concepts of aspirational corporate social responsibility, misleading marketing and greenwashing. Academic insights into critical marketing, the main underlying theme of the study, will also be presented.
The study itself will be described in Chapter 3. Methodology, which addresses the grounds for and methods of data collection and the way in which the empirical work was conducted.
Chapter 4. Findings will detail the results obtained from the study and the main conclusions drawn, in the light of the proposed objectives, by creating a connection between the threads of evidence gathered during the empirical research.
Lastly, Chapter 5. Final Considerations will contain the study’s main conclusions, its main managerial implications, limitations and suggestions for further research. The dissertation structure is shown in Figure 2 below.
Figure 2. Dissertation structure. Source: own elaboration.
Chapter 2. Literature Review
As stated earlier, this chapter will provide the concepts necessary to fully understand the research methodology and research study objectives. It is divided into five sections: • The first section will introduce the concept of corporate social
responsibility;
• Section two will focus on corporate philanthropy and shared value; • Section three will describe the merge between the concept of CSR and
marketing communications;
• Section four will explore ethical issues that may result from it, namely on the universe of misleading marketing;
• Lastly, section five will provide notions of critical marketing.
2.1. Defining Corporate Social Responsibility
“Despite beneficial innovations, inspiring personalities and societal progress, many negative human-induced impacts like climate change, ruthless urbanization, loss of biodiversity, destructive resource extraction, waste, and so forth have happened as well” (Jankov, 2013, p.10). In this context, the need for sustainability is constantly increasing. Individuals are becoming more aware of it as time goes by, and this rising level of awareness seems to be continuously influencing purchasing behaviour. From an economical survival point of view, corporations must constantly search for new strategies to satisfy consumers’ needs and demands, that are substantially more aligned with “green” causes.
According to Galpin, Whittington and Bell (2015) “Sustainability has become the strategic imperative of the new millennium. The phrases sustainability, corporate social responsibility, corporate social performance, going green and the “triple bottom line” all refer to organizations enhancing their long-term economic, social and
environmental performance” (p.1). Within this determination, the concept suggests that there is a possibility for it to be fully incorporated into a business strategy. In this scope, companies have started to implement sustainability into their daily activities, in a practice called Corporate Social Responsibility.
As said by Frederick (2018) Corporate Social Responsibility (henceforth also addressed as CSR) “occurs when a business firm consciously and deliberately acts to enhance the social well-being of those whose lives are affected by the firm’s economic operations” (p.4). It involves companies that deliberately incorporate their positive environmental and social aspects into their businesses and stakeholders communication (Mickels, 2009) and it means that company’s managers and owners are not only responsible for the financial management and legal aspects of their activity, but, in some aspects, they are also responsible for the society as a whole (Piasecki & Gudowski, 2017).
To completely integrate CSR into its business practices and policies, companies “should have in place a process to integrate social, environmental, ethical human rights and consumer concerns into their business operations and core strategy in close collaboration with their stakeholders” (European Comission, 2012).
With this in mind, it is possible to understand that these terms support a premise of a balanced society, in which business is positively incorporated and firms are important contributors to social progress.
However, as stated by Piasecki and Gudowski (2017) the concept of CSR varies widely, given that “it depends on social norms, cultural factors and the level of economic advancement” (p.147). Nonetheless, a particularly important characteristic of it is that it attempts to move away from exclusively prioritizing the maximization of profits (Piasecki & Gudowski, 2017). With this in mind, the concept suggests contributing positively to society, without specifically bearing in mind profits that may emerge from that practice.
Though there is not a particular right definition for the term, Carroll (1991) defends a perspective on which there are four main corporate responsibilities:
• An economic responsibility that concerns activities related to providing satisfaction to consumer’s needs, compensation to its employees, creation of jobs and helping the overall economy, as well as performing as the global capitalism requires, have profit;
• A legal responsibility, that includes the duty of obeying the law and regulations on its field of activity, such as particularities related to taxes, safety of consumers, etc.;
• An ethical responsibility, that regards the actions of not causing harm, “doing the right thing” and making efforts to reduce or not be involved in practices such as child labour, waste, etc., as it is expected from its stakeholders;
• A philanthropic responsibility, which includes the actions that are “beyond” all other responsibilities, such as making donations to charity and participating in projects that “enhance a community’s quality of life” and do what is desired by global stakeholders.
From these definitions, the author constructed the Pyramid of Corporate Social Responsibility, illustrated in Figure 3.
Figure 3. The Pyramid of Corporate Social Responsibility. Source: Adapted from Carroll (1991).
More recently, Rego, Cunha, Cabral-Cardoso, Gonçalves, and Costa (2006), have determined these levels of CSR to be three, namely:
• Proactive change for “the greater good”, where management uses the company’s power to help society without using it as a marketing strategy; • Enlightened self-interest, where management engages in social
responsibility as a marketing strategy;
• Minimum legal requirements, where management limits its sustainability activities to simply follow the law.
In literature, the concept of CSR also connects highly with the Triple Bottom Line or, as named by Roberts and Cohen (2002) People, Planet, Profit (Figure 4). Hammer and Pivo (2016) state that it refers to the “economic, environmental and social value of an investment and is related to the concept of sustainable development” (p.1). In the business context, sustainability happens when all economic, social and
environmental performances are all held in account and the three elements are approached with the same level of importance in business. This balance between the three concepts is what guarantees that the corporate society works in a sustainable way.
Figure 4. The Triple Bottom Line Source: own elaboration.
Additionally, Garriga and Melé (2004) have studied CSR further and mapped the concept as it has been described among academics throughout the years. They have summarized theories and approaches in the groups as stated in Table 1.
Table 1. Theories of CSR.
Source: adapted from Garriga and Melé (2004)
Integrative
The company’s business integrates social demands, given that it depends on society for existence, continuity and growth;
Laws are a constant reference. Political
Companies have a strong power in society which makes them have an obligation to use it responsibly;
Instrumental
CSR policies are strategic tools to achieve profit, create wealth; Altruistic activities are socially recognized, used as a marketing tool; There is a concern about long term shareholders’ value maximization. Ethical
CSR is based on the “right thing to do” to achieve a good society; Reference the human, labour and environmental rights and its protection.
Furthermore, to better understand how this activity applies in practice, Kotler and Lee (2005a) suggest several types of corporate social initiatives, that include cause promotion, cause-related marketing, corporate philanthropy, community volunteering and socially responsible business practices. With this, it is possible to notice that there are countless ways to address this concept, from its implied moral obligation and sustainability aspect to its possible usage as a business tactic opportunity.
With all these concepts in mind, academics seem to agree that CSR is necessarily connected with ethics, philanthropy, well-being, shared value and even legislation, and also that when company behaviour is associated with a philosophy of CSR, it may mean profits to the firm(Jagd, 2013), whether the main motivation for the practice is for it to be profitable or not.
In addition, stakeholders themselves are increasingly becoming more aware of wellness and about protecting the environment, and may tend to choose to buy from companies that communicate those same worries. According to Porter and Kramer (2017), companies are getting ranked in relation with their performance on social issues, and these rankings seem to attract important amounts of publicity, which results in an emergent priority given to CSR in every country.
to change the way they think about products, technologies, processes, and business models” (p.2). This is supported by Boztepe (2012) that states that the “corporate ethical code of the 21st century is being green” (p.7). In this context, green marketing thrives, as the “response to the environmental effects of the design, production, packaging, labelling, use, and disposal of goods and services” (Lampe & Gazda, 1992, p.303).
From the company’s perspective, answering to these effects by communicating its sustainability preoccupations starts to develop to an efficient way of maintaining relationships with its customers given that, if they can offer something that makes a significant green difference, in an intuitive, supported and not much contested by expert evidence way, they are probably “onto a winner” (Grant 2008, p.28). With this in mind, green marketing becomes one of the preferred practices of companies, in terms of communication. Indeed, from 2006 to 2009, green advertising in developed countries has grown about 300 per cent (X. Du, 2014).
However, in the new century, green marketing does not translate into the only way of communicating sustainability. Addressing social aspects such as human rights, labour laws and general welfare of society may also mean profit thus making it have a strong emphasis on marketing practices. With this, marketing communications shift from a practice that communicates product features to generate sales, to a new trend, that searches for connecting the company with causes that the world is worried about. This new trend of cause-related marketing not only addresses environmental topics but also social issues such as abortion rights, child abuse, alcohol abuse, drunk driving, minimum wage, politics, literacy, religion, social security, women’s rights, health, etc. (Fine 1981).
To strengthen this, consumers have also been creating proof that the marketing of these aspects may be beneficial. The green consumer is generally defined as one who adopts environmentally friendly behaviours or who purchases green products over the standard alternatives (Shamdasani, Chon-Lin, & Richmond, 1993), thus a good
definition of the type of stakeholder that demands companies to address its social and environmental responsibilities to society.
Within all of these perspectives, it is once more identifiable the complexity of the analysis of CSR communications practices. There is a necessity to understand it thoroughly in order to decouple its complexity and understand what makes this communication so particular regarding other marketing practices.
2.2. From Philanthropy to Shared Value
As it was determined, CSR can be interpreted as a group of activities, performed by firms, that relate to the expectations of stakeholders regarding what is good for society in general. Within definitions to this concept, an additional term of Corporate Philanthropy, or CP has been thoroughly mentioned. However, this concept seems to generate definitions that create somehow a critical controversy.
Leisinger (2007) sees the practice of philanthropy as sign of corporate responsibility excellence, which towers above the level of good management practices, and defines the concept as “the donation of resources such as a money, goods, time, training and use of facilities or services for an extended period of time, derived from these practices beneficial social purposes. The author addresses the difference between philanthropy and charity, which mostly relates to the durability of practices: charity works as a short-term, while corporate philanthropy is about donating for a cause but within a long-term, durable effect. In this scope, it is proposed a different hierarchy of corporate responsibilities as illustrated in Figure 5.
Figure 5. The Hierarchy of Corporate Responsibilities. Source: adapted from Leisinger (2007)
As for the motives that get companies to engage in these practices, they are indicated as being the creation of good feelings among consumers/suppliers/employees, attraction of valuable human resources to the company, a decrease of the risks of government or activist actions, the enhancement of overall corporate image and brand recognition for goods and services (Henderson & Malani, 2009; Leisinger, 2007). The controversial aspect of this concept, however, is that the altruistic model of philanthropy in business requires engagement in social charitable activities with the intent of benefiting society without connecting those practices with business gains and enhanced image or performance, but “pure altruism can hardly be seen as a driving force for corporate philanthropy” (Kubíčková, 2018, p.71).
On the other hand, there are arguments which state that enlightened self-interest and ethical conduct work well together, with two values being necessary to assure the proper functioning of a corporation: ordinary decency - being just, fair, honest - and
assuring that “the benefits within the corporation are aligned to the contributions made in adhering to the aims of the corporation” (Piasecki & Gudowski, 2017).
On this topic, Kotler and Lee (2005b) specify five main characteristics of philanthropy as a strategic activity. Firstly, they establish it regarding a firm’s selective approach to social issues, connected to its goals and objects. Secondly, it is characterized by long-term delong-termination of relationships and partnerships with non-profit organizations (NPO’s), followed by the diversity of the donation’s options. The fourth characteristic relates to the employee involvement in the decision-making process and lastly, strategic philanthropy is characterized by the corporative efforts to measure outcomes and determine return contributions.
From this perspective, it is understandable why companies may engage in the communication of social responsibility aspects since philanthropic and cause-related activities seem to provide many benefits.
With this, Smith (1994) suggests that corporate philanthropy may allow for the company to align an economic self-interest with a “greater good”, thus encouraging not only economic progress for the company but also the integration of social and environmental contributions to society (as cited in Kubíčková, 2018). This progressive stance emerges from different, updated concept, determined as “shared value”. In this new context, the conceptualization of CSR, CP, etc., shifts to a new paradigm that suggests going beyond the concepts’ core characteristics which, though may generate benefits for society, are not particularly reliable in the long run (Porter and Kramer, 2011).
Porter and Kramer (2011) articulate this new business model, by comparing it to the previous, “outdated” concept of Corporate Social Responsibility and suggesting, instead, a more recent version of it that suggests the creation of shared value, as indicated in Table 2.
Table 2. Comparing CSR with Creating Shared Value. Source: adapted from Porter and Kramer (2011).
Corporate Social Responsibility Creating Shared Value • Value: doing good
• Citizenship, philanthropy, sustainability
• Discretionary or in response to external pressure
• Separated from profit maximization
• Agenda is determined by external reporting and personal references
• Impact limited by corporate footprint and CSR budget
• Value: economic and societal benefits relative to the cost • Joint company and community
value creation
• Integral to competing
• Integral to profit maximization • Agenda is company-specific and
internally generated
• Realigns the entire company budget
To fully align this new business context into its practices, Porter and Kramer (2012) suggest the importance of creating the ideal business case, by aligning the variable of resolving issues of social indole while, from the resolution, obtain a financial return. With this in mind, they suggest four main steps to follow:
1. Identify the social issues to target, which should generate as output a “ list of prioritized social issues that a shared value strategy can target” (Porter et al., 2012).
2. Making the business case, which should provide for details on how the social issue will be fully incorporated in the company’s activity.
3. Tracking the progress, which implies comparing current results with what was planned in previous steps;
4. Measuring results and use insights to unlock new value, which will translate into “validating the anticipated link between social and business results and determining whether the outlay of corporate resources and efforts produced a good joint return” (Porter et al., 2012).
Figure 6. The steps into creating the ideal business case for obtaining shared value. Source: Porter et al. (2012)
With this in mind, the vision of the companies will start to present a different mindset, which will move the companies from the activist, philanthropic field, and will align it with shared value’s pragmatic approach.
2.3. Communicating CSR
As stated by S. Du et al. (2010) and Gruber and Kaliauer (2017), the investment in communicating responsible messages end up translating in a positive impact of CSR communications, namely in terms of purchase intention of consumers, customer loyalty, satisfaction, corporate reputation, brand equity, awareness, advocacy and a bigger amount of capital injected in the company.
However, communications, especially advertising have a contradictory role in the marketing and sustainability debate: they help to both promote a conspicuous consumption but can be extremely necessary to enhance the diffusion of sustainable
products, services and lifestyles (Belz & Peattie, 2009). This makes it necessary that companies carefully plan these practices.
The study Authentic Insights: The Dying Days of Spin, has polled UK consumers and concluded that while 60% of the participants believe it is important for companies to express their views, half of them admitted that they are less likely to purchase a product from a brand that behaves in a way that contradicts its corporate values (Fleishmanhillard Fishburn, 2018). In the same context, “businesses will face extra scrutiny and scepticism when undertaking corporate social initiatives efforts that may be too closely related to issues in which the company contributes negatively or has a vested financial stake” (Austin & Gaither, 2016, p.12). Additionally, more than 38% of consumers expected companies to act on issues such as diversity, climate change, fake news, and several other aspects (Fleishmanhillard Fishburn, 2018).
In the same topic, conclusions of Hupfer and Gardner (1971) defend that the communication of social aspects generally draws more involvement to regular products and that “once a product has been related in the consumer's mind to an issue, something important to him, the probability of this person's retaining knowledge of the product is increased" (p.10). For example, “a person becomes more involved in joining a civil rights movement than he/she becomes when purchasing a commodity item” (Fine, 1981, p.105). Additionally, the “exposure to any type of well-conceived promotional initiative for a brand leads, in theory, to more positive feelings and judgements about the brand in a consumer’s mind” (Bloom, Hoeffler, Keller, & Basurto Meza, 2006, p.51).
On this specific topic, Taylor (2014) states that there has been recently a surge of interest in how advertising and promotion can be used to communicate with consumers about corporate social responsibility aspects. Bachnik and Nowacki (2018) answer to this question, by defending that socially responsible advertising regards marketing activities which “do not arouse negative emotions and do not breach ethical values or ideas shared by customers” (p.4).
In addition, determining an adequate cause is also important. Nan and Heo (2007) defend that an ad with a cause-related message provides more favourable consumer responses compared with a similar ad without that component, and it’s beneficial regardless of the level of brand fit to the cause. However, others argue that initiatives with low fit to the organisation are likely to diminish overall attitude as well as perceptions of corporate credibility, corporate position, and purchase intention (Becker-olsen, Cudmore, & Paul, 2006).
On the other hand, when discussing consumer fit, Grau and Folse (2007) concluded that consumers seem to demonstrate a bigger eagerness in participating in causes on which they are more involved in. This may be a driver for companies to address global issues when advertising their products, since it may generate more engagement. Maheswaran and Meyers-levy (1990) also dwell on this, stating that when the involvement is high, consumers process relevant issues’ messages with more detail which makes negative ads more persuasive. In contrast, for less involved consumers, positively framed messages may be more effective, because they process information in simple inferences (Grau & Folse, 2007) However, most company advertising with a social dimension appears to be well-received among consumers with a majority of consumers accepting it favourably (Drumwright, 1996).
With this in mind, other authors explore a set of specifications that they defend the company that is advertising must meet. Advertising of all kind of information has been reaching to consumers traditionally, through the radio, TV, printed media, outdoor, which show a good return on investment (Pfeiffer & Zinnbauer, 2010), but also through the internet and other new channels. To perform proper communication, companies should use a variety of communication channels, or at least focus on one or two that are more relevant (S. Du et al., 2010). These channels can be internal (the company’s own platforms) or external (independent media coverage, independent organizations) (Gruber & Kaliauer, 2017). However, it is important to note that channels under the control of the own company may be less trustworthy (Becker-olsen
Additionally, when specifying communication channels, and given the emergence of online marketing, it is important to address the activity of communication of CSR through the internet. Indeed, nowadays, using the internet as a means of communication has acquired a significant role when social responsibility efforts are being publicized (Reid & Nwagbara, 2013). This recent channel of communications provides features which are not available in traditional communication channels, such as electronic document retrieval, search tools and multimedia applications (Wanderley, Lucian, Farache, & De Sousa Filho, 2008). In terms of CSR, this channel represents an added feature to marketing communications, by providing, for example, the contents of an annual report, a sustainability report or a corporate homepage (Rosca, Sarau, & Vontea, 2015).
From the context of a corporate website, according to (Capriotti & Moreno, 2007) most of the available content is primarily found between the second and third hierarchical levels, which favours accessibility to the information.
On another context, Kendrick et al. (2013) merge CSR with advertising by elucidating the concept’s connection with Carroll’s Pyramid of Social Responsibility: “Advertising agencies have the economic responsibility for creating jobs, facilitating the competition in the free market, and thereby maintaining a healthy national economy. Legal responsibility of advertising agencies is no simpler than that of other businesses. (…) deceptive, misleading, and unfair advertising is subject to regulation” (p.144). Additionally, from the ethical responsibility perspective, the authors mention unethical advertising as “the omission of key facts, manipulation of the presentation order of information, and use of potentially misleading rhetoric are not overt lies but may result in deception. Thus, the truthfulness of advertising can be seen as an ethical responsibility as much as, if not more than, a legal responsibility” (p.144)
From the particularity of truthfulness in advertising, the concept of trust starts also to represent a big part of marketing communications. As stated by Bachnik and Nowacki (2018) advertising appeals seem to constitute one of the main tools for fostering
consumer trust. On this scope, S. Du et al. (2010) have proposed a framework that suggests reducing stakeholders’ scepticism by focusing on message content and the channels these are communicated in, while understanding the contingency factors such as the stakeholders’ characteristics and those of the firm itself.
In addition, to also gain credibility while advertising CSR, it is necessary to:
• educate consumers about CSR efforts, by providing information about it; • carefully choose the CSR communication channel, with external sources
being more credible to consumers;
• make contributions explicit, with clear, high in information and with specific content messages.
(Gruber & Kaliauer, 2017) Moreover, the core concept of Corporate Social Responsibility has maturated to have an addendum related to communication, with the emergence of an aspirational dimension. As stated by Koep (2017) aspirational CSR regards communications which announce intentions and plans for the future (p.1).
Additionally, there is a distinction between CSR as an action, which relates to CSR practices that have happened in the past and CSR as a talk, which relates to communications of intentions for the future (Christensen, Morsing, & Thyssen, 2013). Koep (2017) has developed a framework which determined contrasting forces mentioned in the literature on aspirational communication of CSR (Figure 7).
Figure 7. Opposing Forces in Aspirational CSR Communication. Source: Koep (2017)
As it is possible to determine, aspirational CSR communication is related to a set of polarizations which create an emphasis in distinguishing between an open and closed discourse. From the perspective of open discourse, academics have connected it more with vaguely talking and focusing on the future, while that, from a close discourse perspective, more concrete, well-founded claims and actions of the past are addressed. In addition, Koep (2017) concluded that “combining the sometimes opposing poles of talk and action poses difficulties due to the consequent tensions and clashes between organisational self-promotion and factual reporting style” (p.17).
In fact, one of these difficulties regards the rise of inherent corporate profits with practices of CSR. This context seems to have created a good environment for CSR activities to be appropriated by corporations to seem caring and socially conscious, when actual behaviour may contradict the CSR’s premise (Budinsky, 2011). In fact,
“without a demonstrable history of doing good and evidence-based outcomes of these deeds, audiences will rightly greet CSR claims with scepticism and distrust” (Pomering, Johnson, & Noble, 2013, p.10).
This happens because
many of our everyday items can now be found in a luxurious shade of green. In fact, business can be a vehicle for doing better in the world and making a comfortable living with a guilt-free conscience as well. But in an increasingly crowded green business sphere, knowing who's authentic presents a challenge.
(Jeevan, 2014, p.4)
This type of marketing communication turns into a difficult process, since truthful claims from the own organisation or even from external third parties start to become difficult to identify (Gosselt, van Rompay, & Haske, 2019).
2.4. Ethics and Greenwashing
In the past, “business actions were overwhelmingly profit-driven with little regard for the effects of these actions on employees, consumers or the greater social good” (Davis, 1994, p.873) Now, conversations about ethics, value, integrity and responsibility is practically required (Stodder,1998).
Joyner and Payne (2002) cite a Walker Information survey to consumers, where “47% of those polled responded that they would be much more likely to buy from a “good” company given parity in quality, service and price” and 70% of the consumers answered that they would not do business with a firm that was not socially responsible, regardless of price.” (p.298). They also point out that “good business is good ethics” (p.298).
According to the Oxford English Dictionary, ethics stands for the moral principles that govern a person's behaviour and the moral correctness of specified conduct. Statements of ethics or value judgements “attempt to ascribe value to actions, so the actor can determine whether or not he should engage in the action” (Joyner & Payne, 2002, p.299). In relation, business ethics, is the study of appropriate business policies and practices regarding potentially controversial subjects (Twin, 2019) Business ethics can either be understood from an internal perspective – such as by attitudes between workers and managers, conflicts between personal and corporate values – or externally – when it relates to influences from the society and public authorities (Halttunen & Inkilä, 2014). For companies, business ethics are mainly determined by stakeholders’ pressure to, for example, reduce the environmental impact created out of their business-related activities (Longoni, Luzzini, & Guerci, 2018).
To answer to this pressure, companies started to, as stated before, produce self-reporting initiatives such as the publication of green advertisements, creation of social issues-related campaigns, and sustainability reports. These practices have been trending so much that companies with board-level sustainability committees have increased from 5% to 24% and the number of companies releasing sustainability reports has grown 20% to 80% on the United States alone, but with these phenomenon manifesting globally (Ioannou & Serafeim, 2017).
However, while it is easy to conclude that consumers expectations and pressure takes a big part in forcing companies to be sustainable, in many cases this could be the result of regulations created to incentivize companies to improve their environmental, social and governance performance (or ESG). Additionally, the emergence of sustainability and social problems addressing has caused the companies to start shadowing their negative aspects, while blindly empower the positive ones. Under this new reality, academics started to address issues related to aspirational communication of CSR, or, as a highly serious problem in communication ethics, greenwashing.
Defined as “the act of misleading consumers regarding the environmental practices of organizations (firm-level greenwashing) or the environmental benefits of a product or service (product-level greenwashing)” (Delmas & Burbano, 2011, p. 66) Greenwashing involves suggesting a better environmental performance than the actual environmental behaviour justifies (De Jong, Harkink, and Barth, 2017, p.3). These suggestions are often vague, unsubstantiated and potentially misleading (Fernando, Sivakumaran, and Suganthi, 2014, p.224). To Steiner, Geissler, Schreder, and Zenk (2018), “Greenwashing expresses an incongruence between the reputational intention and the actual, real sustainability performance of the company”(p.1002). In addition, Lyon and Montgomery (2015) defend that the term “greenwash” encompasses a range of communications that mislead people into adopting overly positive beliefs about an organization’s environmental performance, practices, or products (p.225). Some authors also named this trend as “the green spin” (Alves, 2009) or the “disclosure-performance gap” (Font, Walmsley, Cogotti, McCombes, & Häusler, 2012). Additionally, when describing greenwashing, Laufer (2003, p.254) states that some corporations will hold themselves out as fully committed to compliance when that commitment is in fact absent.
In the American Continent, the consciousness on this problem rose with a publication of a set of studies called Greenwashing Reports. According to Terra Choice (2010), the company that conveyed the studies, since the first “Sins of Greenwashing study was published in 2007, which explored environmental claims in products, the world has re-awakened to the issue of false and misleading environmental claims. The latest of these reports took place in 2010 and analysed a total of 4,744 products. From its analysis, the company was able to determine that greenwashing was still considered a significant problem, with over 95% of the products advertised as “green products” revealing greenwashing traits (Terra Choice, 2010).
With this in mind, the classification of greenwashing as a marketing trend that intends to mislead consumers and other stakeholders seems to be a point of agreement within
present in an enormous scope of actions, taken by different people and in different situations, even within the same company, the corporations that practice greenwashing may be difficult to identify.
Furthermore, though what the word “green” implies, greenwashing as a term is mostly but not specifically used for claims about the environment, thus conveying more a misleading type of communication. For example, the suggestion of misleading marketing in the food sector, this phenomenon is also perceptible.
Sometimes, food companies use green on their packaging to suggest health in the nutritional qualities of a product; but sometimes healthy is about fewer toxins in agriculture or the health of the environment in general. The confusion can benefit food and beverage companies because if consumers equate green with either their own health or with the health of the environment, they are likely to extend that favourable association to the product and to the company.
(Berkeley Media Studies, 2008)
This informs that the concept of greenwashing has shifted and evolved, and gained a new subsector called nutriwashing, that happens when companies in the food sector use the colour green to generate consumer’s health-related thoughts to benefit sales of products. Most of the times, the colour green is used to wrongly communicate health benefits just to acquire sales from concerned consumers. Additionally, Corpwatch (2001) has identified other variations of greenwashing, such as bluewashing, sweatwashing and deep greenwashing.
Table 3. The variants of greenwashing. Source: adapted from Corpwatch (2001)
Greenwashing Misleading consumers regarding the environmental practices of organizations.
Nutriwashing Using the colour green, slim packaging shapes, etc., in the food industry, to guide the consumer to associate health-related thoughts to a certain product.
Bluewashing
Corporations wrapping themselves in the blue flag of the United Nations in order to be associated with UN themes of human rights, labour rights and environmental protection.
Sweatwashing
Diverting the attention of production practices in the company’s factories, that are associated with child and hard labour.
Deep greenwashing
Lack of efforts by the world’s government to stop the corporations from publicizing themselves through voluntary codes of conduct, win-win partnerships and best practices learning models.
With all these concepts in mind, it is possible to conclude that, with a bigger concern for sustainability, the communication on its behalf rises. This type of marketing will then strengthen consumers who prefer green products and companies that are involved with social causes over others. Consequently, with the intent of seducing this base of consumers, corporations will increasingly opt with communication their positive aspects, since these are the ones who will make the consumer chose between them or the competition. The disruption of this timeline is that, sometimes intentionally, sometimes not, companies may compromise the truthfulness of the facts they communicate about themselves and their practices, thus committing greenwashing.
2.5. Green, Social and Critical Marketing
In sustainability, green marketing and social marketing are constantly mentioned. As it was possible to determine previously, green marketing facilitates the development and marketing of more sustainable products and services while introducing sustainability efforts into the core of the marketing process and business practice (Gordon, Carrigan, & Hastings, 2011, p.143).
In the early 20th century, however, Wiebe (1951) expressed that marketing tools and
methods could be used outside the domain of commodities. He firstly asked, in 1951, “Can brotherhood be sold like soap?” starting the debate that would have originated the term of Social Marketing as a discipline of the School of Marketing that dedicated itself to the promotion of social aspects and society’s wellbeing.
However, other academics see that the emergence of social marketing can be a further augmentation of marketing as a “technique”, that translates into the uncritical application of various methods, tools and ways of thinking in relation to marketing activities (Moorman, 1987). Indeed, marketing is a social activity and critical stances should impact its topics (Diniz, Petroll, Semprebon, & Rocha, 2016). The activity itself has a role that highly interacts with society, and its exclusion from the critical discussion might be harmful, especially given its ideological and economic consequences to society (Maranhão & Paula, 2012). With this in mind, it is perceptible that there is a necessity for marketers to be flexible and prepared to adapt their practice into a more thorough application than sales augmentation.
From this, critical marketing emerges as an activity that is defined through a range of critical positions under one label that is not, as traditional marketing suggests, undertaken with the sole interest of developing knowledge to enable the maximization of sales (Tadajewski & Brownie, 2008). It is, naturally, an activity that should be practised carefully, with though, because its effect can have negative effects in society when applied negatively. In the scope of this topic, Gordon et al (2011) propose a new framework for sustainability marketing, as illustrated in Figure 8.
Figure 8. A framework of sustainable marketing. Source: adapted from Gordon et al (2011)
In other words, critical studies propose analysing practical influences of marketing practices, driven by the growth of corporations, the quick implementation of communication technologies, globalization, changes in work nature, professionalization of workforces, stagnated economies and ecological problems everywhere and in every market (Deetz & Alvesson, 1999). With this in mind, these studies should reflect worries regarding these and several other social issues.
Chapter 3. Methodology
As stated in Chapter 1. Introduction, this dissertation aims to explore the phenomenon of the corporate communication of social responsibility. To this end, the methodology adopted was designed to identify the way in which companies communicate corporate social responsibility through such documents as annual sustainability reports, examine how the temptation to engage in potentially misleading marketing practices can be a high risk strategy for the companies and also determine possible consumer perceptions of the corporate communication of sustainability, in terms of the trust in and credibility of advertising.
The methodology adopted was a case study of The Coca-Cola Company. A case study proposes a strategy for doing research through which an empirical investigation of a particular contemporary phenomenon is illustrated by a real-life context, using multiple sources of evidence (Robson, 2002). The work performed in the field suggests a qualitative study would be the best approach. This would be conducted in three distinct parts and rooted subsequent triangulation. Triangulation refers to the use of different data collection techniques within one study (Lewis Adrian Thornhill & Thornhill, 2012). With this in mind, this chapter will describe the nature of the research methodology in more detail.
3.1. Case Study: The Coca-Cola Company
Coca-Cola’s history begins on the 8th of May 1886, in Atlanta, USA, with a pharmacist named John Pemberton, who created a syrup to solve digestive problems and give energy to drinkers. At the time, a cup of this beverage cost 5 cents per glass and an average of nine cups were being sold daily.
However, Frank Robinson, Dr. Pemberton’s accountant, started marketing the drink, by idealising the brand and designing its first logo. In 1892, the Coca-Cola Company was founded and two years later, the product was registered at the National Industrial Property Institute of the USA. Today, it operates in more than 200 countries and runs the largest beverage distribution system in the world. It has reached a level of brand recognition that many companies would like to have, mostly due to its homonymous product, Coca-Cola (or Coke), and its easily recognizable logo (Figure 9).
Figure 9. The Coca-Cola Company logo. Source: Wikipedia.
Despite the unquestionable popularity of Coca-Cola, the company now offers more than 500 equally successful brands and 4,300 different products worldwide and has net operating profits of 31.9 billion dollars (The Coca Cola Company, 2018). Other famous products are Diet Coke, Coca-Cola Zero Sugar, Sprite, Fanta, Mello Yello, Surge, Powerade, glacéau vitamin water, Dasani, Honest Tea, Costa Coffee, among many others.
The company serves its consumers in more than 200 countries through a network of company-owned and/or controlled bottling and distribution operations, independent bottling partners, such as distributors, wholesalers and retailers, all of which make up the world’s largest beverage distribution system (The Coca-Cola Company, 2017). It has reached a brand positioning where it is viewed as a fun, friendly, youthful company, that sells “happiness” at an affordable price. More recently, however, it seems to have
shifted to a wider set of word associations, through numerous corporate responsibility campaigns and public environmental commitments.
This has emerged from a huge Integrated Marketing Communications (IMC) effort. The analysis in this dissertation would not be possible without referring to this effort, given that it focuses not just on a specific set of documents – the sustainability reports – but also on other promotional activities and campaigns. The IMC aims to “coordinate and control the various elements of the promotional mix - advertising, personal selling, public relations, publicity, direct marketing, and sales promotion - to produce a unified customer-focused message and, therefore, achieve various organizational objectives (Boone & Kurtz, 2007, p.488). One reason for the increased importance of this concept over recent decades has been its important role in the development and maintenance process of the brand entity and equity (Belch & Belch, 2008).
By integrating its marketing communications, Coca-Cola contributes to creating brand equity, since it has a big value in the market and a wide number of consumers emotionally attached to it. Feldwick, (1996) has simplified this term by collating several definitions, These include brand equity being defined as the total value of the brand as a separable asset, brand equity being the measurement of the consumers strength of attachment to the brand and brand equity being the description of the associations and beliefs consumers have about the brand. To achieve this, the company has engaged in several marketing initiatives, such as integrating conventional media and new media. This approach helps convey socially responsible messages, thus constructing its brand image as a sustainable, ethical company. Naturally, Coca-Cola would not disregard the online public relations element in its marketing strategy, and actually integrates it in a very robust way.
On November 12, 2012, it invited the world to join it on its new “journey” by replacing its corporate website with an interactive digital magazine – The Coca-Cola Journey website1
Figure 10. Coca-Cola Journey website landing page from October 2019. Source: The Coca-Cola Company
This website takes the form of a whole promotion tool and represents a strong content marketing strategy, which offers dynamic content that approaches a wide range of social responsibility subjects, from recycling to women’s rights, via water consumption reduction, diversity inclusion and the company’s eagerness to “give back”. Additionally, it is also possible to find out how the company is doing regarding its goals. Indeed, it can be seen as a platform that focuses on updated sustainability topics, communicated through videos, infographics, and consumer-oriented articles. It is also used as a tool for promoting the credibility and transparency that all companies want
to achieve. In fact, the journey website actively communicates the company’s social policies and contributions to making a better world, rather than focusing on its products and selling them.
Ashley Brown, director for digital communications and social media at the company, stated at the time of launching the website that “although the content comes with a point of view, we want it to be a credible source” (Elliott, 2012). From this, we may deduce that it is a core platform for the sharing of sustainability practices and the communication of the company’s corporate social responsibility.
More specifically, on the 9th of July 2013, Coca-Cola first introduced its 2020
environmental goals to the world (see Annex 1. “Our 2020 Environmental Goals” infographic.). These are depicted as follows:
• Water Stewardship: Improve water efficiency by 25%, help ensure healthy, resilient freshwater systems through conservation efforts with World Wildlife Fund and replenish 100% of the water the company uses; • Energy and Climate: Reduce CO2 emissions embedded in “the drink in
our hands” by 25% through the company’s entire value chain;
• Packaging: Reach a 75% recovery rate in developed markets of the equivalent amount of bottles and cans they introduce in the marketplace; • Agriculture: Sustainably source key agricultural ingredients.
(The Coca Cola Company, 2013)
In the light of this company’s self-proclaimed goals, this dissertation chooses to scrutinise the communication of environmentally friendly initiatives on the plastic problem the world faces nowadays.
A key factor in selecting plastic as a focus is Parker's (2018) affirmation: “We made plastic. We depend on it. Now we’re drowning in it”. Scientific studies can help maintain the relevance of this problem and make companies feel that it is necessary to address them. Additionally, a first reading of Coca-Cola’s materials suggests that the company is engaged in helping the world with this problem, as the analysis will show.
3.2. Research Methodology
To conduct any research, it is necessary to choose between systematic procedures to describe and explain the phenomenon being studied. For this, two possible methods are applicable: the quantitative and the qualitative.
A quantitative analysis deals with data in the form of numbers and uses mathematical operations to investigate their properties. Some of the primary purposes of this approach are to measure, compare, examine relationships, make forecasts, test hypotheses and construct theories (Walliman, 2011). The quantitative method relies on surveys, questionnaires and pools to collect quantitative data and obtain objective measurements and numerical analysis.
The qualitative method, on the other hand, “examines the way people make sense out of their own concrete real-life experiences, in their own minds and in their own words” (Cropley, 2009, p.5). This method aims to understand the social realities of people and their culture, thus making it primarily exploratory research. It is used to gain an understanding of underlying reasons, opinions and motivations, explaining the “how” and “why”. Qualitative data collection methods include focus groups and individual or group interviews.
Research can also mix these methods, thus allowing for a combination of numerical measurement and in-depth data. This means it is also possible to investigate subjects by dividing the study into several parts, each explored by both quantitative and qualitative methods.
A study can also be conducted through a multimethod approach, which includes the use of more than one method of data collection in a study or set of related studies. With these concepts in mind, this dissertation proposes an analysis of qualitative data, gathered through both primary and secondary methods. To achieve this, a single case study of The Coca-Cola Company was conducted. A single case study is, as the name suggests, a case study which relies on the use of a single unit for the purpose of research (Gerring, 2004). This is valid where the single unit represents a critical case or, alternatively, an extreme or unique case (Lewis Adrian Thornhill & Thornhill, 2012). Within this specific definition, The Coca-Cola Company was chosen firstly for its mediacy and its world-wide recognisability and secondly because the literature research revealed several studies that dealt with Coca-Cola’s marketing strategy, under distinct subtopics in marketing studies (Lanthorn, 2013; Halttunen & Inkilä, 2014; Mayureshnikan & Patil, 2018).
Furthermore, the company’s level of recognition puts it under a spotlight, which creates an environment in which it can be positioned from various perspectives, both positive and negative. To analyse the company from a critical marketing stance, this methodology proposes investigating three different perspectives: firstly, the company’s own policy regarding sustainability, as found in its reports; secondly, the media perspective, through the analysis of a journalistic investigative documentary; lastly, from the point of view of consumers, through one-on-one interviews.
Finally, after this work has been done, the data will be triangulated. According to Heale and Forbes (2013) triangulation in research is the use of more than one approach to researching a question, that has as main objective to provide a more comprehensive picture and increase the value of findings. This study will separate out the main highlights and determine what the possible challenges, implications, tensions and complexities are regarding the communication of corporate social responsibility.
Additionally, and as mentioned above, critical marketing is the lens through which conclusions will be drawn. This is justified by the sources of data collection selected: while the three perspectives of the company, media, and consumers will be cross analysed, the main differences between contrasting and/or differentiated visions will perpetuate the notion that marketing is not a simple scheme where everything is linear and simple. It is a complex activity, which must be analysed in depth in order to deconstruct its postulates and processes and which must take different points of view into consideration, in order to progress as a social activity.
The following sections will specify how the various parts of this research were conducted.
3.3. Sources of Data Collection
As determined previously, this case study will cover three distinct parts (Figure 11), in order to better understand the Coca-Cola Company’s communication of sustainability and the challenges that may emerge from its strategy. The study will look at the tensions and divergences between the different perspectives of the company’s communication strategy: that of the company, through the sustainability reports and communication on the company’s environmentally friendly plastic policies; that of the media, through the description and analysis of “A Plastic Surgery: Coca-Cola’s Hidden Secrets” documentary, which explores those same policies of the company and its potentially misleading green marketing communication; that of the consumer, through one-on-one interviews, which will explore the consumers thoughts regarding the same issue.
